• Welcome to Focus on Photography Forum!
    Come join the fun, make new friends and get access to hidden forums, resources, galleries and more.
    We encourage you to sign up and join our community.

Image posting debugging thread

That was the same problem I was seeing. I was using an EF-S 15-85 on an R10 with an adapter. I posted 2 images in the same thread Wednesday afternoon, then the same images about 8 hours later to separate threads. The first pair displayed full EXIF, the next 2 had no lens info. Since then I've had no lens info on any shots made with that lens.

Not a big deal for me, but you can add it to your diagnostics.
 
In my case even Lr doesn't see my Zeiss lenses with either the R5 or R3. It gets focal length and aperture, but that's it. I researched it at one time and if I recall correctly resolving it wasn't worth it to me.
 
All, follow this graphic below for best results if you wish to UPLOAD your images. Both Ken's photos that gave him issues before are uploading and displaying the exif info just fine above. I used the Insert Image icon (looks like a photo on the top row) and NOT the Attach files paper clip in the bottom row.

1736746118538.png
 
Here's one that I posted yesterday in the Digital Speed Challenge. Lens info was truncated there. Checking to see about now with the 'Insert Image' in the edit menu. LE_12-0520.jpg

Edit: Hey, it worked.

Edit 2: I first noticed this happening with the 'Attach files' button on Wed, 1/8 sometime between 15:55 PST (last good EXIF) and 23:41 (first truncated).
 
Last edited:
All, follow this graphic below for best results if you wish to UPLOAD your images. Both Ken's photos that gave him issues before are uploading and displaying the exif info just fine above. I used the Insert Image icon (looks like a photo on the top row) and NOT the Attach files paper clip in the bottom row.

View attachment 136259

I always assumed that it meant actual files, not images...
and yes I know images are image files ;) . I mean pdf, xls, doc etc
 
Here's one that I posted yesterday in the Digital Speed Challenge. Lens info was truncated there. Checking to see about now with the 'Insert Image' in the edit menu. View attachment 136263

Edit: Hey, it worked.

Edit 2: I first noticed this happening with the 'Attach files' button on Wed, 1/8 sometime between 15:55 PST (last good EXIF) and 23:41 (first truncated).
Good to know about the timing, Ken. It is possible that the functionality of Attach files button was changed with the XF forum software update. I’ll do some checking on this.
 
Glad I found this thread. The problem the began showing up at the same time I was posting the first images edited with a new MacBook Pro. I was worried that my export presets got messed up somehow.

It's not surprising that an update would affect one button and not the other, but does seem odd to me that only certain EXIF items would get left out. Must be some pretty convoluted code in there.
 
There does seem some significant level of frustration among other forum admins about the arbitrary and capricious nature of Xenforo software development, often (at least in the views of the admins) without soliciting user feedback/inputs. I haven't been doing this long enough to make hard conclusions regarding this, but this does seem like odd behavior (some may call it a bug ;)).
 
Yes my understanding is the EXIF add-on only works with uploaded images.

POTN managed to extract this from external hosting services but this was an ongoing issue for Pekka keeping up with the changes from those services. This method is not available to XenForo.

A possible solution is to auto uploaded embedded images, there may be an add-on for this.

Question is do members want this?
 
Personally I have never understood the obsession with EXIF, it is of limited use and value. This thread was started because the EXIF was missing from a picture of a waterfall and someone asked the question “what shutter-speed did you use?” However, another factor that is just as important as the shutter-speed in creating motion blur is the speed of the water, but for some reason no one ever asks that question, even though it has just as much effect on the image as does shutter-speed.

Another example; a panning shot of a racing car. Motion blur is the result of shutter-speed and vehicle speed. A car travelling at 50mph and shot at 1/60 of a second will have exactly the same amount of motion blur as a car travelling at 25mph and shot at 1/30 of a second, or a car travelling at 100mph and shot at 1/125 of a second. But no one ever asks “what was the speed of the car,” the question is always “what shutter-speed did you use.”

If on the other hand you were to use the same shutter-speed of 1/60 of a second to photograph a car travelling at 25mph, 50mph, and 100mph respectively, all the images would have different amounts of motion blur in them.
 
Personally I have never understood the obsession with EXIF, it is of limited use and value. This thread was started because the EXIF was missing from a picture of a waterfall and someone asked the question “what shutter-speed did you use?” However, another factor that is just as important as the shutter-speed in creating motion blur is the speed of the water, but for some reason no one ever asks that question, even though it has just as much effect on the image as does shutter-speed.

Another example; a panning shot of a racing car. Motion blur is the result of shutter-speed and vehicle speed. A car travelling at 50mph and shot at 1/60 of a second will have exactly the same amount of motion blur as a car travelling at 25mph and shot at 1/30 of a second, or a car travelling at 100mph and shot at 1/125 of a second. But no one ever asks “what was the speed of the car,” the question is always “what shutter-speed did you use.”

If on the other hand you were to use the same shutter-speed of 1/60 of a second to photograph a car travelling at 25mph, 50mph, and 100mph respectively, all the images would have different amounts of motion blur in them.
True, that's a fair point. I am personally more interested in the lens information on photos, and to a lesser degree, the camera information. If I see a photo that has some very specific characteristic, either the bokeh, or how it handles flare, or corner to corner performance on an UWA or whatever, the first question that comes to my mind is - what lens is that with. To me, having the EXIF info helps figure that out. But yes, I agree with your point that the EXIF tells part but not all of the story.
 
Yes my understanding is the EXIF add-on only works with uploaded images.

POTN managed to extract this from external hosting services but this was an ongoing issue for Pekka keeping up with the changes from those services. This method is not available to XenForo.

A possible solution is to auto uploaded embedded images, there may be an add-on for this.

Question is do members want this?
If the images are linked to flickr, exif information is shown there if someone follows the link. Based on the comment below, that is true of other hosting sites as well:
POTN managed to extract this from external hosting services but this was an ongoing issue for Pekka keeping up with the changes from those services.


There does seem some significant level of frustration among other forum admins about the arbitrary and capricious nature of Xenforo software development, often (at least in the views of the admins) without soliciting user feedback/inputs. I haven't been doing this long enough to make hard conclusions regarding this, but this does seem like odd behavior (some may call it a bug ;)).
Perhaps users and admins need to proactively provide feedback? Send them an email about what features you would like. Adobe, for example, updates their software but I was never solicited for user feedback. They may pay attention if I took the trouble to send them my suggestions.
 
Another example; a panning shot of a racing car. Motion blur is the result of shutter-speed and vehicle speed. A car travelling at 50mph and shot at 1/60 of a second will have exactly the same amount of motion blur as a car travelling at 25mph and shot at 1/30 of a second, or a car travelling at 100mph and shot at 1/125 of a second. But no one ever asks “what was the speed of the car,” the question is always “what shutter-speed did you use.”
I agree with your sentiment - but the shutter speed is nicely encapsulated in the image data, and can be extracted fairly easily/automatically - the speed of the car is not, and would rely on the shooter being able to estimate that accurately. So I also understand why the desire exists to be able to extract and display the info we know should always be there (unless stripped out by the poster). But asking for the other user-dependent info is also useful, if available.

"How fast was the car going?"

"I dunno, really fast?"

;)
 
Back
Top Bottom